DUST Search - Tankers: Pick two of three poll

All Channels

General Discussions

Tankers: Pick two of three poll

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Awry Barux New Eden Blades Of The Azure Zero-Day 580	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:07:00 - [1] - Quote Tanks right now are fast, durable, and can deal massive damage to infantry. Which two aspects would you like to keep? Because you're not allowed to have all three.
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1220	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:10:00 - [2] - Quote Yeah we can. Lol. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
NK Scout Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 370	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:16:00 - [3] - Quote Awry Barux wrote: Tanks right now are fast, durable, and can deal massive damage to infantry. Which two aspects would you like to keep? Because you're not allowed to have all three. The madrugar is the problem, the gunlogi strugles to aim 2 exiles assault rifles, Skinweave caldari frame, Staff recruiter mlt frame, Templar set Caldari Master Race
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7070	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:33:00 - [4] - Quote Awry Barux wrote: Tanks right now are fast, durable, and can deal massive damage to infantry. Which two aspects would you like to keep? Because you're not allowed to have all three. Tanks never should be able to have anti infantry capacity on their pilot/main gunner but they should be able to OHKO infantry they nail with their slower firing anti vehicle main gun,. "Just know that though our enemies may only #YOLO, through God's grace we can #YOLF at his side." - Disciple of Kesha
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 269	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:42:00 - [5] - Quote Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive.
NK Scout Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 372	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:47:00 - [6] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. No they shoudlnt be up Unless they are op for 4 more months 2 exiles assault rifles, Skinweave caldari frame, Staff recruiter mlt frame, Templar set Caldari Master Race
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7071	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:48:00 - [7] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ******* ignorant you are doesn't it. "Just know that though our enemies may only #YOLO, through God's grace we can #YOLF at his side." - Disciple of Kesha
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1631	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:51:00 - [8] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ******* ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Praise St. Arzad and Pass the Nanohives Karin Midular, gone, never forgotten Executing Amarr Trash since Closed Beta
NK Scout Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 372	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:52:00 - [9] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Tanks were for 6 months 2 exiles assault rifles, Skinweave caldari frame, Staff recruiter mlt frame, Templar set Caldari Master Race**
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1631	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:56:00 - [10] - Quote I stand by my assertion. I would not be surprised at all, if a small minority of tankers have soured the opinions of many (though perhaps not all) "AV Infantry" players who will be gunning specifically for this vocal minority. Praise St. Arzad and Pass the Nanohives Karin Midular, gone, never forgotten Executing Amarr Trash since Closed Beta

True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7072	Posted - 2014.02.15 08:57:00 - [11] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. "Just know that though our enemies may only #YOLO, through God's grace we can #YOLF at his side." - Disciple of Kesha
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4477	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:02:00 - [12] - Quote Tanks shouldn't be able to outrun LAVs in terms of straightline speed. Also, tanks shouldn't be anti-infantry without compromising on anti-vehicle capabilities. Blasters are too good at too many jobs at too long a range to fit EITHER the claim of anti-infantry or short-range weapon. So Blasters: ACTUALLY limited range, or counting as small arms when shooting vehicles. Pick one. All Railgun turrets need is semi-competent map design to control their lines of fire (particularly from the redline).
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1631	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:06:00 - [13] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. Balance should always be at the forefront of AV v V discussions. Personally, I want both sides to require intelligence and teamwork to prosper. I feel this would be best achieved through Crew Service for all vehicles (and not just Dropships/LAVs) as well as requiring that AV Infantry need to work together to destroy them (outside of extreme circumstances such as PRO AV v MLT/STD V). Balance should be based on unmodded AV and V with no hardeners (with slight adjustments for the inclusion of either, they should modify not dictate). Praise St. Arzad and Pass the Nanohives Karin Midular, gone, never forgotten Executing Amarr Trash since Closed Beta
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 270	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:09:00 - [14] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. Wow I guess I hit home with that thales comment eh? Whatever mouth-breather, tanks are currently skill-less pwn-mobiles that allow the risk averse to AVOID DAMAGE FROM OVER HALF OF THE GAME. The caps part is the b-llshit portion if you didn't realize it. You guys are the biggest f-cking crybabies this game has ever seen, and now as a community you think we are near balance. How f-cking much would tankers cry if there was something in this game that they couldn't damage and that could OHKO or insta-blap them? Oh right, we already know because that is what they did prior to 1.6. *Now that the situation is 100% inverted, they think everything is fine.* Anyway, my point stands. Tanker = thales users.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7076	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:12:00 - [15] - Quote Garrett Blacknova wrote: Tanks shouldn't be able to outrun LAVs in terms of straightline speed. Also, tanks shouldn't be anti-infantry without compromising on anti-vehicle capabilities. Blasters are too good at too many jobs at too long a range to fit EITHER the claim of anti-infantry or short-range weapon. So Blasters: ACTUALLY limited range, or counting as small arms when shooting vehicles. Pick one. All Railgun turrets need is semi-competent map design to control their lines of fire (particularly from the redline). Nah they shouldn't, that ** is pretty ridiculous I have to agree. Tanks shouldn't be anti infantry at all. When was the last time you saw a Main Battle Tank with a .50 Cal as its main gun....never right, so why should Dust 514 tanks operate like that. I'd much rather see Racial Main Battle Cannon, like the Rail gun on All HAV making combat more situational. No longer would HAV massacre infantry like my 31/0 game today, we'd skill shot our targets so no one could *** about it, we'd focus on clear the battlefield of installations and other ground vehicles, we could be as durable as we are now, and be slowed slightly, to compensate for our strengths. I would love to see balanced HAV in Dust 514 as right now they are woefully unbalanced. "Just know that though our enemies may only #YOLO, through God's grace we can #YOLF at his side." - Disciple of Kesha
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 7076	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:15:00 - [16] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. Wow I guess I hit home with that thales comment eh? Whatever mouth-breather, tanks are currently skill-less pwn-mobiles that allow the risk averse to AVOID DAMAGE FROM OVER HALF OF THE GAME. The caps part is the b-llshit portion if you didn't realize it. You guys are the biggest f-cking crybabies this game has ever seen, and now as a community you think we are near balance. How f-cking much would tankers cry if there was something in this game that they couldn't damage and that could OHKO or insta-blap them? Oh right, we already know because that is what they did prior to 1.6. *Now that the situation is 100% inverted, they think everything is fine.* Anyway, my point stands. Tanker = thales users. I wouldn't know what Sniping or Thales using is like I don't have skills in either since I find such combat style distasteful. When you spend more than a significant portion of your in game time nerfed through the floor then you can whine, since you have only suffered about 6 weeks you have no reason to *****. I would love to see orbitals, if their mechanics were changed insta blap me, kinda feels like they already should since I am being shot with a turret mounted on a 100m long ship. Dunno what else would insta blap me, if you have a well thought out suggestion I am all ears. "Just know that though our enemies may only #YOLO, through God's grace we can #YOLF at his side." - Disciple of Kesha
NK Scout Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 372	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:16:00 - [17] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. Wow I guess I hit home with that thales comment eh? Whatever mouth-breather, tanks are currently skill-less pwn-mobiles that allow the risk averse to AVOID DAMAGE FROM OVER HALF OF THE GAME. The caps part is the b-llshit portion if you didn't realize it. You guys are the biggest f-cking crybabies this game has ever seen, and now as a community you think we are near balance. How f-cking much would tankers cry if there was something in this game that they couldn't damage and that could OHKO or insta-blap them? Oh right, we already know because that is what they did prior to 1.6. *Now that the situation is 100% inverted, they think everything is fine.* Anyway, my point stands. Tanker = thales users. Much much isk does infantry lose in a pub? 2 exiles assault rifles, Skinweave caldari frame, Staff recruiter mlt frame, Templar set Caldari Master Race
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 1674	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:16:00 - [18] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. Wow I guess I hit home with that thales comment eh? Whatever mouth-breather, tanks are currently skill-less pwn-mobiles that allow the risk averse to AVOID DAMAGE FROM OVER HALF OF THE GAME. The caps part is the b-llshit portion if you didn't realize it. You guys are the biggest f-cking crybabies this game has ever seen, and now as a community you think we are near balance. How f-cking much would tankers cry if there was something in this game that they couldn't damage and that could OHKO or insta-blap them? Oh right, we already know because that is what they did prior to 1.6. *Now that the situation is 100% inverted, they think everything is fine.* Anyway, my point stands. Tanker = thales users. You're a scrub. I kill tanks more cheaply and effectively* outside my tank. I have fitting opt 5 for large railguns - does that tell you my dedication to my trade? I have about 3.5 M invested in an AV build. Put up or shut up. *in this context effectively = performing squad support as opposed to solely AV, like a railgun. Happily printing ISK with permahardeners and MLT blasters. Just let me get a couple mil more before nerf, CCP!
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4478	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:18:00 - [19] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: Tanks shouldn't be able to outrun LAVs in terms of straightline speed. Also, tanks shouldn't be anti-infantry without compromising on anti-vehicle capabilities. Blasters are too good at too many jobs at too long a range to fit EITHER the claim of anti-infantry or short-range weapon. So Blasters: ACTUALLY limited range, or counting as small arms when shooting vehicles. Pick one. All Railgun turrets need is semi-competent map design to control their lines of fire (particularly from the redline). Nah they shouldn't, that ** is pretty ridiculous I have to agree. Tanks shouldn't be anti infantry at all. When was the last time you saw a Main Battle Tank with a .50 Cal as its main gun....never right, so why should Dust 514 tanks operate like that. I'd much rather see Racial Main Battle Cannon, like the Rail gun on All HAV making combat more situational. No longer would HAV massacre infantry like my 31/0 game today, we'd skill shot our targets so no one could *** about it, we'd focus on clear the battlefield of installations and other ground vehicles, we could be as durable as we are now, and be slowed slightly, to compensate for our strengths. I would love to see balanced HAV in Dust 514 as right now they are woefully unbalanced. If a tank could be anti-infantry by sacrificing its anti-vehicle role, I wouldn't object. Making Blasters as effective against other vehicles as ARs would actually balance them, because then people would only use them when supported by AC weaponry to hold off enemy tanks, and if you saw someone running Blasters and brought even your Missile-armed LAV out, you could take them down (especially if the LAV can move faster than the tank).
NK Scout Storm Wind Strikeforce Caldari State 372	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:24:00 - [20] - Quote Garrett Blacknova wrote: True Adamance wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: Tanks shouldn't be able to outrun LAVs in terms of straightline speed. Also, tanks shouldn't be anti-infantry without compromising on anti-vehicle capabilities. Blasters are too good at too many jobs at too long a range to fit EITHER the claim of anti-infantry or short-range weapon. So Blasters: ACTUALLY limited range, or counting as small arms when shooting vehicles. Pick one. All Railgun turrets need is semi-competent map design to control their lines of fire (particularly from the redline). Nah they shouldn't, that ** is pretty ridiculous I have to agree. Tanks shouldn't be anti infantry at all. When was the last time you saw a Main Battle Tank with a .50 Cal as its main gun....never right, so why should Dust 514 tanks operate like that. I'd much rather see Racial Main Battle Cannon, like the Rail gun on All HAV making combat more situational. No longer would HAV massacre infantry like my 31/0 game today, we'd skill shot our targets so no one could * about it, we'd focus on clear the battlefield of installations and other ground vehicles, we could be as durable as we are now, and be slowed slightly, to compensate for our strengths. I would love to see balanced HAV in Dust 514 as right now they are woefully unbalanced. If a tank could be anti-infantry by sacrificing its anti-vehicle role, I wouldn't object. Making Blasters as effective against other vehicles as ARs would actually balance them, because then people would only use them when supported by AC weaponry to hold off enemy tanks, and if you saw someone running Blasters and brought even your Missile-armed LAV out, you could take them down (especially if the LAV can move faster than the tank). If blasters did that damage, no one would run blasters.....but they need a damage and range reduction 2 exiles assault rifles, Skinweave caldari frame, Staff recruiter mlt frame, Templar set Caldari Master Race**

Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 270	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:38:00 - [21] - Quote True Adamance wrote: I wouldn't know what Sniping or Thales using is like I don't have skills in either since I find such combat style distasteful. When you spend more than a significant portion of your in game time nerfed through the floor then you can whine, since you have only suffered about 6 weeks you have no reason to ***. I would love to see orbitals, if their mechanics were changed insta blap me, kinda feels like they already should since I am being shot with a turret mounted on a 100m long ship. Dunno what else would insta blap me, if you have a well thought out suggestion I am all ears. You find hiding in the redline away from the reach of 90% of infantry while killing them distastful, so you jump in a tank away from the reach of 90% of infantry while killing them.... yeah that adds up. So its actually over 9 weeks, over half the amount of time that tanks were bullshit for and we still have at least another 4 weeks to go, so do you feel better now? Do you feel like this horrible balance against infantry is paying you back for where the bad CCP touched you? There should be a non-vehicle based solution, available to anyone to skill into, that works as well against vehicles as vehicles work against infantry. I am not sure what we should call this new role, but it would be the antithesis of vehicles.... lets shorten that, we will call this role anti-vehicle or AV for short. This role should be 100% as effective against vehicles as vehicles are against infantry, and in-turn infantry should be 100% as efficient against AV as AV is against vehicles. This paradigm will require effective teams to represent all phases of gameplay. NK Scout wrote: Much much isk does infantry lose in a pub? Oh so Isk is a balancing factor here right? Well seeing as how there are barely any Gastun Forge guns in the game, meaning they are worth WAY MORE than a tank, I guess they should OHKO any vehicle from any distance..... since we are using isk to balance and all. Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:** You're a scrub. I kill tanks more cheaply and effectively* outside my tank. I have fitting opt 5 for large railguns - does that tell you my dedication to my trade? I have about 3.5 M invested in an AV build. Put up or shut up. *in this context effectively = performing squad support as opposed to solely AV, like a railgun. ^^^ Calling someone a scrub is a good indicator we have a neckbeard here. How is life in your mom's basement Mr. Ketch-up stained A-shirt wearer? Anyway, refute my point, refute that tankers get to avoid well over 80% of all forms of damage in this game while being perfectly effective versus everything, show me how there is a counter to a tank that works better than a tank (you know.... balance). Right now tanks are just carriages for risk averse cry-babies. Go get your diaper changed and hop back in one. So you are a neckbeard and a carebear.
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 1677	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:39:00 - [22] - Quote Garrett Blacknova wrote: True Adamance wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: Tanks shouldn't be able to outrun LAVs in terms of straightline speed. Also, tanks shouldn't be anti-infantry without compromising on anti-vehicle capabilities. Blasters are too good at too many jobs at too long a range to fit EITHER the claim of anti-infantry or short-range weapon. So Blasters: ACTUALLY limited range, or counting as small arms when shooting vehicles. Pick one. All Railgun turrets need is semi-competent map design to control their lines of fire (particularly from the redline). Nah they shouldn't, that ** is pretty ridiculous I have to agree. Tanks shouldn't be anti infantry at all. When was the last time you saw a Main Battle Tank with a .50 Cal as its main gun....never right, so why should Dust 514 tanks operate like that. I'd much rather see Racial Main Battle Cannon, like the Rail gun on All HAV making combat more situational. No longer would HAV massacre infantry like my 31/0 game today, we'd skill shot our targets so no one could *** about it, we'd focus on clear the battlefield of installations and other ground vehicles, we could be as durable as we are now, and be slowed slightly, to compensate for our strengths. I would love to see balanced HAV in Dust 514 as right now they are woefully unbalanced. If a tank could be anti-infantry by sacrificing its anti-vehicle role, I wouldn't object. Making Blasters as effective against other vehicles as ARs would actually balance them, because then people would only use them when supported by AV weaponry to hold off enemy tanks, and if you saw someone running Blasters and brought even your Missile-armed LAV out, you could take them down (especially if the LAV can move faster than the tank). I think 90% is excessive - 50% is more reasonable; it still allows the potential for ganking another HAV, rather than whT we have now where a competent blaster user is king of CQC. Missile should have that role, IMO. Forge on for great justice! Defend the meek! Destroy the weak! Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
Lorhak Gannarsein Science For Death 1677	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:46:00 - [23] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: True Adamance wrote: I wouldn't know what Sniping or Thales using is like I don't have skills in either since I find such combat style distasteful. When you spend more than a significant portion of your in game time nerfed through the floor then you can whine, since you have only suffered about 6 weeks you have no reason to ***. I would love to see orbitals, if their mechanics were changed insta blap me, kinda feels like they already should since I am being shot with a turret mounted on a 100m long ship. Dunno what else would insta blap me, if you have a well thought out suggestion I am all ears. You find hiding in the redline away from the reach of 90% of infantry while killing them distastful, so you jump in a tank away from the reach of 90% of infantry while killing them.... yeah that adds up. So its actually over 9 weeks, over half the amount of time that tanks were bullshit for and we still have at least another 4 weeks to go, so do you feel better now? Do you feel like this horrible balance against infantry is paying you back for where the bad CCP touched you? There should be a non-vehicle based solution, available to anyone to skill into, that works as well against vehicles as vehicles work against infantry. I am not sure what we should call this new role, but it would be the antithesis of vehicles.... lets shorten that, we will call this role anti-vehicle or AV for short. This role should be 100% as effective against vehicles as vehicles are against infantry, and in-turn infantry should be 100% as efficient against AV as AV is against vehicles. This paradigm will require effective teams to represent all phases of gameplay. NK Scout wrote: Much much isk does infantry lose in a pub? Oh so Isk is a balancing factor here right? Well seeing as how there are barely any Gastun Forge guns in the game, meaning they are worth WAY MORE than a tank, I guess they should OHKO any vehicle from any distance..... since we are using isk to balance and all. Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:** You're a scrub. I kill tanks more cheaply and effectively* outside my tank. I have fitting opt 5 for large railguns - does that tell you my dedication to my trade? I have about 3.5 M invested in an AV build. Put up or shut up. in this context effectively = performing squad support as opposed to solely AV, like a railgun. ^^^ Calling someone a scrub is a good indicator we have a neckbeard here. How is life in your mom's basement Mr. Ketch-up stained A-shirt wearer? Anyway, refute my point, refute that tankers get to avoid well over 80% of all forms of damage in this game while being perfectly effective versus everything, show me how there is a counter to a tank that works better than a tank (you know.... balance). Right now tanks are just carriages for risk averse cry-babies. Go get your diaper changed and hop back in one. So you are a neckbeard and a carebear. Yep, tanks avoid most damage in this game. Not gonna refute that . Forge gun is better than tanks - assuming you're competent? It always has been. Probably always will be. Stealth is a wonderful thing. I'm going to enjoy 1.8 - it's removing any downsides from forge gunning. 'Risk averse'? Most pilots I know run 450k+ fits. We used to run 800k+ fits. Risk averse? My 450k investment can be two-shotted from the other side of the map by a 0SP nub. Or two guys with collectively less SP invested than me that insta me. My forge gun suit is 50k. I have zero problems destroying red tanks. When I do, I phone a friend. Can't do that? Pull an MLT hull, scrub, and QQ some more. We dealt with this bull*** 'balance' for nine months, it's your turn to bend over and take it. I will leave you with some parting words often relayed to me by persons on your side of the debate... Adapt or die. Forge on for great justice! Defend the meek! Destroy the weak! Q-sync breaches into the rectum of everyone else!
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 4479	Posted - 2014.02.15 09:48:00 - [24] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: I think 90% is excessive - 50% is more reasonable; it still allows the potential for ganking another HAV, rather than whT we have now where a competent blaster user is king of CQC. Missile should have that role, IMO. The point was massive damage reduction against vehicles with the logic that they're an anti-infantry weapon. The specific value isn't as important. And as for making them CQC kings, that would be fine too, IF they were limited to an actual CQC range (and if tanks were slow enough for limited range to actually be a significant factor in a fight). Slow HAVs down to less than LAV speed, leave Blaster damage alone, but cut their range back far enough that they don't outrange ARs, and that would fix them just as well as making them weaker agaisnt vehicles. Either solution is viable.
Crimson Cerberes Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance 271	Posted - 2014.02.15 10:02:00 - [25] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Yep, tanks avoid most damage in this game. Not gonna refute that . Forge gun is better than tanks - assuming you're competent? It always has been. Probably always will be. Stealth is a wonderful thing. I'm going to enjoy 1.8 - it's removing any downsides from forge gunning. 'Risk averse'? Most pilots I know run 450k+ fits. We used to run 800k+ fits. Risk averse? My 450k investment can be two-shotted from the other side of the map by a 0SP nub. Or two guys with collectively less SP invested than me that insta me. My forge gun suit is 50k. I have zero problems destroying red tanks. When I do, I phone a friend. Can't do that? Pull an MLT hull, scrub, and QQ some more. We dealt with this bull**** 'balance' for nine months, it's your turn to bend over and take it. I will leave you with some parting words often relayed to me by persons on your side of the debate... Adapt or die. Uhh.. in what world are forge guns better than tanks? Do forge guns make you impervious to 90% of the weaponry in this game? Do forge guns allow you to mow down entire squads of infantry with impunity? Do forge guns even out-damage the tanking capability of a tank? (the answer of course is not really, 3 armor reps = 525 hp/sec, 1 maxxed out IAFG(with reloads) ~ 550DPS) Your statement about dealing with it is exactly the problem here, you don't see a problem. It is exactly the reason why when there is balance between the two (AV and vehciles) everyone will destroy every/any tank they see no matter the cost. Because you a thales red-liner on wheels.
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1221	Posted - 2014.02.15 13:20:00 - [26] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Funny, I play with a tank like everything else in the game. I play to enjoy things. Really, many of you players need to reevaluate why you play a video game. You keep wanting to assume others play this game with the same dire attitude that you do. You could play a tank too; but, choose not to and then show an unreasoned hatred for it. If you are playing for any other reason than fun then please quit the game. You are ruining it for everyone else. Console kiddies. Whatcha gonna do. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1221	Posted - 2014.02.15 13:23:00 - [27] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Yep, tanks avoid most damage in this game. Not gonna refute that . Forge gun is better than tanks - assuming you're competent? It always has been. Probably always will be. Stealth is a wonderful thing. I'm going to enjoy 1.8 - it's removing any downsides from forge gunning. 'Risk averse'? Most pilots I know run 450k+ fits. We used to run 800k+ fits. Risk averse? My 450k investment can be two-shotted from the other side of the map by a 0SP nub. Or two guys with collectively less SP invested than me that insta me. My forge gun suit is 50k. I have zero problems destroying red tanks. When I do, I phone a friend. Can't do that? Pull an MLT hull, scrub, and QQ some more. We dealt with this bull**** 'balance' for nine months, it's your turn to bend over and take it. I will leave you with some parting words often relayed to me by persons on your side of the debate... Adapt or die. Uhh.. in what world are forge guns better than tanks? Do forge guns make you impervious to 90% of the weaponry in this game? Do forge guns allow you to mow down entire squads of infantry with impunity? Do forge guns even out-damage the tanking capability of a tank? (the answer of course is not really, 3 armor reps = 525 hp/sec, 1 maxxed out IAFG(with reloads) ~ 550DPS) Your statement about dealing with it is exactly the problem here, you don't see a problem. It is exactly the reason why when there is balance between the two (AV and vehciles) everyone will destroy every/any tank they see no matter the cost. Because you a thales red-liner on wheels. Doesn't sound like you want balance either. You, like most other tankophobes just want to destroy a playstyle you don't want to like. Tanks are in the process of being balanced. CCP can't have a public test server on PS3. These patches are the testing. We are actively testing stuff and CCP will make changes next patch. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
Henchmen21 Planet Express LLC 551	Posted - 2014.02.15 13:25:00 - [28] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. Wow I guess I hit home with that thales comment eh? Whatever mouth-breather, tanks are currently skill-less pwn-mobiles that allow the risk averse to AVOID DAMAGE FROM OVER HALF OF THE GAME. The caps part is the b-llshit portion if you didn't realize it. You guys are the biggest f-cking crybabies this game has ever seen, and now as a community you think we are near balance. How f-cking much would tankers cry if there was something in this game that they couldn't damage and that could OHKO or insta-blap them? Oh right, we already know because that is what they did prior to 1.6. *Now that the situation is 100% inverted, they think everything is fine.* Anyway, my point stands. Tanker = thales users. I am going to disagree I have a chance to kill tankers, even if it means running a jahad jeep into the redline. Thale users are neigh on invulnerable. CCP your matchmaking sucks Henchmen21: Infantry Gotyougood Ufkr: Vehicles
Billi Gene 485	Posted - 2014.02.15 13:55:00 - [29] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: True Adamance wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: True Adamance wrote: Crimson Cerberes wrote: Tankers = thales users. They want to be safe from most of the game while still killing others. Unfortunately thales users, and soon to be nerfed tanks, incite a mouth frothing rage that makes people forget about isk efficiency, K/D ratios, and anything else in the quest to kill the carebears. So, when tanks get nerfed and AV vs tanks is balanced, expect every single tank that gets deployed to be mercilessly destroyed almost instantly because of the hatred that you tankers have caused. Just like what happened after tanks got nerfed the first time, people remember and they do not forgive. Pffff this poorly thought out assessment shows how ***** ignorant you are doesn't it. I would say that it is a fair assessment of a particularly belligerent and vocal segment of the tanker community. The vocal minority if you will. I agree that it is by no means an accurate assessment as a blanket statement, though of the aforementioned segment, it is spot on. Pff if you call Spkr the vocal majority. For the most part Tankers didn't want another patch of being woefully underpowered or more blanket nerfs against AV. You haven't hurt...unless you are a scout..... unless you experienced the pain of High DPS Autolocking Swarmers ar 400m' while forgers remained invisible at 50m. But agreed. Most veteran tankers, and sane balance oriented ones like myself, are aware of how broken tanks are, they need changes and it seems like we are the only section of the community willing to offer reasonable suggestions. All the rest of you seem to do it *** and moan and call us scrubs but then in the same game fail to combat tanks better than most "scrub" tankers can. The hypocrisy of that is rich, too rich. As such blanket statements like that are only indicative of how weak minded an individual like this guy is. Wow I guess I hit home with that thales comment eh? Whatever mouth-breather, tanks are currently skill-less pwn-mobiles that allow the risk averse to AVOID DAMAGE FROM OVER HALF OF THE GAME. The caps part is the b-llshit portion if you didn't realize it. You guys are the biggest f-cking crybabies this game has ever seen, and now as a community you think we are near balance. How f-cking much would tankers cry if there was something in this game that they couldn't damage and that could OHKO or insta-blap them? Oh right, we already know because that is what they did prior to 1.6. *Now that the situation is 100% inverted, they think everything is fine.* Anyway, my point stands. Tanker = thales users. your point is an opinion and a badly formed and overly emotive one at that. stop abusing people and stop inferring your opinion as the only valid opinion. Unless you came here to scream and shout and rant, in which case carry on, you'll get the attention you deserve. If you came here looking for discussion, then be prepared to form arguments based around not only your own ideas but those of others. At this point I'm fairly sure you're just a troll. Pedant, Ape, Troll. My Beard makes Alpha's sook :P
The Attorney General 1968	Posted - 2014.02.15 14:09:00 - [30] - Quote Crimson Cerberes wrote: Wow I guess I hit home with that thales comment eh? Whatever mouth-breather, tanks are currently skill-less pwn-mobiles that allow the risk averse to AVOID DAMAGE FROM OVER HALF OF THE GAME. The caps part is the b-llshit portion if you didn't realize it. You guys are the biggest f-cking crybabies this game has ever seen, and now as a community you think we are near balance. How f-cking much would tankers cry if there was something in this game that they couldn't damage and that could OHKO or insta-blap them? Oh right, we already know because that is what they did prior to 1.6. *Now that the situation is 100% inverted, they think everything is fine.* Anyway, my point stands. Tanker = thales users. This patch has been around long enough that everyone should have a proto forge and be able to chew up tanks. Yet none of them do, and tanks reign supreme. If you, as an infantryman would learn to protect yourself then you wouldn't be getting stepped on. MLT tanks are easy to destroy, and redline rails are not affecting a fight at the flags most times. Mr. Hybrid Vayu.



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.